As I read the discussions, arguments, specs, histories, etc. of RSS and Atom, it becomes more and more apparent that the principals behind these formats are primarily focused on blogging. That's fine, of course. But I can't help but get the impression that decisions regarding the formats and APIs are being made in such a blog-centric way that they risk reducing their suitability for other purposes.

Are the required elements of a feed required because it makes sense to require them for a blog, regardless of whether they're applicable to other uses like publishing comic strips, poetry, or earthquake data? Are the APIs similarly focused around blogging in ways that will make them cumbersome to use for publishing other types of content?

The other day, while reading on Sam Ruby's www.intertwingly.net, I came across a page discussing the concept of profiles. Essentially, the ideas is that you create a file format spec with fewer requirements, and then create profiles which define stricter requirements for particular purposes. The baseline spec may require just a few elements, but a profile for blogging could require more. This idea makes a lot of sense to me. With profiles, you don't place an unnecessary burden on everyone using the format because you want to be able to depend on certain elements being there when the format is used for a particular type of content.

I don't know enough about the discussions that have gone before to know how much attention has been paid to non-blogging uses of RSS and Atom, but I wonder whether the formats would benefit from a little focused discussion on the subject.